Global Warming or Wholesale Global Indoctrination on a Massive Scale

Primary tabs

The question of alleged Man-Made Global Warming (MMGW) is highly divisive to say the least. Like any vicious civil war, it regrettably sets good friends and family against each other.

In the following article I shall try to dispel a few popular misconceptions in the sincere hope that greater clarification will develop.

Cultures on the whole are largely emotionally dependent on the religious worldviews that have created them. When we get down to intimately analysing the psychology ‘behind’ MMGW beliefs, we soon discover we are dealing with a subsidiary of biblical myth (end-time/ messianic ethos). I am not alone in fielding this claim.

Three quarters of those who ‘believe’ in it have never identified or acknowledged the big difference between MMGW and climate change. This really is the vital crux of the matter. The ‘big difference’ I highlight here has unfortunately caught out many good and caring folk who have simply been unmindful to the major difference at hand!

The climate has always moved through dramatic cycles and some have been more significant than others. Today we find folks in one area of the planet crying out for drier weather, whilst others say: ‘please send the rains this way as our land is parched and dying’. This summer for instance is set to be the second wettest in the UK since records began, according to the Met Office. It never seems to stop raining here. Other lands though are seeing entire woodlands dry up and die. No one is disputing that this is occurring!

The big question remains - is this a man-made problem (and it isn't) or not. Nothing we can do will modify it because Gaia/Mother Nature is too dominant, certainly far too commanding for mere man-made science to solve the alleged problem. People who place all their faith in the great God of Science (like most graduates etc, these days) hold onto their sacred MMGW views like religious fundamentalists hold onto their apocalyptic, Armageddon position. In effect, many Christians believe in ‘both’ theories of course and unite with the proposal that man is ethically ‘accountable’ for the demise of the planet through MMGW by his ‘sinful’ activities. Of course, old Satan gets the blame herein as can be expected. The Horned fellow has misled mankind, they cry, into destruction and this helps to support their messianic faith regarding an anticipated Second Coming following a satanic fall…

The myth consequently plays right into the subliminal expectancies of the indoctrinated West, which is of course historically Christian-oriented. Within the so-called New Age culture many look to the God of Science to create anticipated relief ‘against’ the natural cycles of Gaia. Man, in his ignorance, as always tries to interfere with ‘Her’ mysterious moods in which the balance is eventually restored.

Many have become so indoctrinated into a wholesale dependence on science that they have utterly missed the finer points of the debate. They wrongly see science as the ‘Great Redeemer’ and in doing so see science as the only solution to what they erroneously ‘think’ needs fixing. They have swallowed the idea that intellect is somehow superior to everything else hook, line and sinker! Science is widely perceived as logical yet it invented the ‘Bomb’, which could annihilate the planet in the first place and is far more dangerous than alleged MMGW. Therefore, if the Bomb was invented by an allegedly rational force then why do the globalwarmists consider science to be so well-judged in essence when depending on it to save us from the spectre of MMGW?

The alarmists appear to think they know ‘better’ than the gods themselves and place contemporary science ‘above’ the will and power of the gods. This is typical human vanity brought about by reliance in the indoctrinated credos of both monotheistic and scientific half-truths. Sadly a subconscious ‘us against them’ mentality has been forged by the alarmists. Anyone who dares to criticise the MMGM belief system is instantly judged to be immoral and perceived as the blasphemous Bad Guy. Nothing could be further from the truth however.

Current climatic system reality is what it is and this is because the gods decree that it is this way.

· Do we know ‘better’ than the gods?

· Can we see farther down the road of evolution than they do?

· Is contemporary science (and mankind) greater than the awesome, universal, powers (that some of us call the gods) that created everything in the first place?

Climate will change yet again when the gods wish it to do so, regardless of mankind’s fruitless hopes and fears. Mankind’s subconscious guilt complex, over a naturally changing climate phenomenon, will not modify what is occurring on a grand scale. Humanity may wish it to be different but we has to learn, as any good marine will tell you, to ‘adapt and improvise’ towards the new situation at hand.

The earth, like the greater cosmos, is constantly changing and we must learn to change too. We will never ‘ever’ have power over the climate or the planet because we are typically reliant upon it for our very survival. Science is deviant and supercilious in many instances. Until the alarmists realise their thinking uses a bankrupt philosophy they will never actually access the entire truth. In many ways this is the core of the matter at hand.

I advocate care/respect for the ecosystem and have been happy to defend it at all cost many times. I have also discovered that most genuine occultists realise that the gods are in control of the climate (not man). Pseudo-scientific esoteric misinformation has trapped many otherwise first-class people in a deceptive world of guilt, wherein man is generally considered to be immoral and a stain on the planet.

Yes agreed, mankind is most certainly ‘not’ without blame when it comes to outrageous commercial destruction of the environment for profit - but he/she cannot be expected to change what cannot be changed, via a wasteful reliance upon the God of Science.

The Latest Version of the Witchcraft Threat!

A growing body of principal scientific minds are now expressing deep concern over disproportionate claims concerning global warming theories, that have now become the darling ‘Holy Crusade’ of numerous scientists and politicians, perhaps seeking to extend their reputation via ‘supposed’ ecological concern in public circles. It seems that almost everything which goes wrong is somehow or somewhere blamed, by shrewd politicians etc, on supposed MMGW. It has become a huge 'Scapegoat entity’ in its own right. In fact it’s the new version of erroneous, anciently-perceived witchcraft threats for whatever is thought to be wrong within the environment; the new 'Bogey man' that's coming to get us all unless we mend our wicked ways; ways that are suggested and then ‘controlled’ by those in power! Volcano, flood, earthquake, forest fire - blame it all on our 'carbon emissions' and get your "bike" out to save the planet!

With first-hand political experience I have actually seen the thin veneer of deception behind the alleged concern of numerous devious politicians. MMGW is a massive and widely accepted swindle that helps to place these political movers into a better public perception. And better perception equals one thing; more votes in the election booth!

Our politicians, who frequently and without question gladly accept scientifically-unconfirmed theories as hard fact, tell us that we burn fossil fuels, which discharge amplified levels of carbon dioxide - the primary so-called 'Greenhouse' gas' into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They inform us this is global warming and that it's largely our fault! A growing number of distinguished scientists are now however saying that this is utter gobbledygook. Regrettably though for the moment, it is the more 'pessimistic' worldview that apparently has majority support. MMGW, at least the contemporary frightening, end of the world alarmist description of it, is an ongoing fable. It is an extremely well-coordinated falsehood that the mind-controllers within society are ingeniously using to keep the monopoly on us. I feel that it is only a question of time until the cat is out of the bag and the rest of the population finally wises up to this mega-scam.

It may be worth considering earlier words presented by that most agreeable gentleman, 'Professor David Bellamy':

“To explain why I believe that global warming is largely a natural phenomenon that has been with us for 13,000 years and probably isn't causing us any harm anyway, we need to take heed of some basic facts of botanical science. For a start, carbon dioxide is not the dreaded killer greenhouse gas that the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and the subsequent Kyoto Protocol five years later cracked it up to be. It is, in fact, the most important airborne fertiliser in the world, and without it there would be no green plants at all. That is because, as any schoolchild will tell you, plants take in carbon dioxide and water and, with the help of a little sunshine, convert them into complex carbon compounds - that we either eat, build with or just admire - and oxygen, which just happens to keep the rest of the planet alive. Increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, double it even, and this would produce a rise in plant productivity. Call me a biased old plant lover but that doesn't sound like much of a killer gas to me. Hooray for global warming is what I say, and so do a lot of my fellow scientists. Let me quote from a petition produced by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has been signed by over 18,000 scientists who are totally opposed to the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the world's leading industrial nations to cut their production of greenhouse gasses from fossil fuels. They say: 'Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide are in error and do not conform to experimental knowledge.' You couldn't get much plainer than that. And yet we still have public figures such as Sir David King, scientific adviser to Her Majesty's Government, making preposterous statements such as 'by the end of this century, the only continent we will be able to live on is Antarctica.' At the same time, he's joined the bandwagon that blames just about everything on global warming, regardless of the scientific evidence. For example, take the alarm about rising sea levels around the south coast of England and subsequent flooding along the region's rivers. According to Sir David, global warming is largely to blame. But it isn't at all - it's down to bad management of water catchments, building on flood plains and the incontestable fact that the south of England is gradually sinking below the waves. And that sinking is nothing to do with rising sea levels caused by ice-caps melting. Instead, it is purely related to an entirely natural warping of the Earth's crust, which could only be reversed by sticking one of the enormously heavy ice-caps from past ice ages back on top of Scotland. Ah, ice ages... those absolutely massive changes in global climate that environmentalists don't like to talk about because they provide such strong evidence that climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon. It was round about the end of the last ice age, some 13,000 years ago, that a global warming process did undoubtedly begin. Not because of all those Stone age folk roasting mammoth meat on fossil fuel camp fires but because of something called the 'Milankovitch Cycles,' an entirely natural fact of planetary life that depends on the tilt of the Earth's axis and its orbit around the sun. "

Melted

"The glaciers melted, the ice cap retreated and Stone Age man could begin hunting again. But a couple of millennia later, it got very cold again and everyone headed south. Then it warmed up so much that water from melted ice filled the English Channel and we became an island. The truth is that the climate has been yo-yo-ing up and down ever since. Whereas it was warm enough for Romans to produce good wine in York, on the other hand, King Canute had to dig up peat to warm his people. And then it started getting warm again. Up and down, up and down - that is how temperature and climate have always gone in the past and there is no proof they are not still doing exactly the same thing now. In other words, climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon, nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels. In fact, a recent scientific paper, rather unenticingly titled 'Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over The Last Glacial Termination,' proved it. It showed that increases in temperature are responsible for increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, not the other way around.”

Other experts have voiced similar concern over climate alarmist theories too:

"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His speech was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was sponsored by the free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a professor at MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.

Patrick J. Michaels is the author of a new book "Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media." He is an environmental sciences professor at the University of Virginia who believes that claims of human-caused "global warming" are scientifically unfounded. Michaels spoke with CNSNews.com Thursday following a panel discussion sponsored by the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., where Michaels also serves as a senior fellow in environmental studies. "John McCain, a Republican, has probably held the most biased hearing of all," Michaels said. McCain is a big proponent of limiting greenhouse gas emissions, which he believes are causing "global warming." The Arizona senator also "is trying to define himself as an environmental Republican, which he is going to use to differentiate himself from his rivals for the (presidential) nomination in 2008," according to Michaels.

A packed house of staff and media heard on Capitol Hill about sea-level rise from Dr. David Malmquist, Assistant Research Scientist at the Bermuda Biological Station for Research. This scientific discussion sponsored by the Cooler Heads Coalition clarified some of the mysteries of the sea. "Sea level rise has been occurring for thousands of years and is explained by natural processes," Dr. Malmquist observed. Claims that alleged human-induced global warming will cause sea level rise to accelerate is unfounded, he said. "Observations show that current accelerated rates of sea level rise date back to the early 19th century and preceded any substantial inputs of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from the Industrial Revolution."

The European Science And Environment Forum - a group of independent scientists concerned about "premature certainty" on environmental issues described the Greenhouse Effect as "a Political rather than a scientific phenomenon" in their 1996 book, The Global Warming Debate.

Friis-Christensen and Lassen pointed out in the Journal of Atmospheric & Terrestrial Physics that 83% of global temperature variations since the 1500s can be accounted for by the solar cycle.

Eminent physicist, Nigel Calder, has written a book - The Manic Sun - which challenges the idea that burning fossil fuels warms the planet.

Dr Piers Corbyn of Weather Action and the Southbank University wrote a major article in the May edition of Weather Action. This began by questioning the "conventional wisdom" of man made global warming which were "clearly contradicted" by reliable satellite measurements. He said that the fundamental assumptions behind GWT must be challenged.

Global warming has happened many times before cars and industry were invented, and to higher degree than now. Climatologists agree that during the period 9,000 BC - 5,000 BC global temperatures were over two degrees warmer than now, while a team led by Prof. Shamesh of the Weizmann Institute, Israel, has shown from lake sediments in Kenya that there was another period of global warming between 350 BC and 450 AD.

Another point of interest is that Mother Nature produces far more greenhouse gases than humans do. For instance, when the Mount Pinatubo volcano erupted, within just a few hours it had thrown into the atmosphere 30 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide, that’s almost twice as much as all the factories, power plants and cars in the United States do in an entire year. Oceans release 90 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, each year. Decomposing plants push out another 90 billion tonnes, compared to just six billion tonnes a year from man. 100 million years ago, there was six times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is today, nonetheless the temperature then was marginally cooler than it is today. Numerous scientists have also concluded that carbon dioxide doesn't even influence climate.
Incidentally, I covered much of this heated topic in my book ‘Dirty Politics’:

Supplementary care for the ecosystem is always urgently needed and anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly either a fool or deranged in some way. I realise that ‘Shooting the Messenger’ may seem like a good idea to some, but I would be extremely negligent if I failed to speak out against this most serious untruth My motives are principled and always aligned to helping to preserve the fragile green spaces that all species require to survive. That was why I started the focal point in my own region called ‘Save Southport Greenbelt’.

I cannot however in good conscious stand by and watch mankind wander into an epic failure like this without challenge! Wasting trillions of dollar/pounds etc on fixing what ‘cannot’ be fixed (i.e. an ongoing natural phenomenon) is totally reprehensible. Such massive resources can build hospitals; feed the sick and grown crops to save the starving masses. They can help our environmental agencies to prosecute despicable polluters of our river systems and plant new woodlands for the birds, etc.
Adaption and improvisation to change is the key along with greater education (not misleading propaganda) towards the matter at hand.

Comments

As always, your thoughts are stimulating. I agree, generally, with your take on undue religious influence on our thinking. I disagree that this is influencing the science of CO2 exacerbation of current global warming. True, the geologic history demonstrates astounding, naturally occurring weather changes due to a multitude of causes. This does not cancel out current influences caused by homo sapiens. We are profoundly influencing natural processes. This is new in Gaia's long history.

John McCain, former POW and an amazing man in many ways, believes radical climate change is real, and this is one of your points against the reality of climate change??? I don't agree with McCain on many subjects but I respect him. He lives in the western U.S. and knows what is happening there as do many western friends who are heart-sick at the rapid decline of the environment out there.

My website is www.earthchangepredictions.com, I invite you to visit! I write Exo-Trekking, a free online newsletter which goes outside the box of conventional thinking on UFOs, aliens, and the Unknown, an exciting contribution to current UFOlogy.

I thoroughly enjoyed this article and couldn't agree with you more. Climate change has been big business for scientists for many years now with associated big salaries.
It is well known that climate has always changed either towards ice age or hotter periods. I agree that man made effects cannot be proven. One volcanic eruption spews more bad gases into the atmosphere than we can imagine being expelled by our lifestyles.

Scientists and policy-makers must now deal with unexpected reality that controlling CO2 and Greenhouse emissions may have no overall effect at stopping Climate Change and Global Warming. If he were here, Charles Darwin might suggest that man will simply need to find ways to "adapt" (again) to a warming planet.
http://phys.org/news/2012-06-arctic-climate-vulnerable-thought-linked.html

Top NASA Climate Scientist, James Hansen, Says Global Warming is Not Man-Made -- In a paper published in PNAS, Hansen argues that "rapid warming in recent decades has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse gases... not by the products of fossil fuel burning, CO2 and aerosols..."
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/18/9875.full.pdf+html?sid=293beaa5-09f9-4575-bef0-12e771b6269f

Comments limited to 500 characters, however, individuals keep adding comment after comment after comment when no reply has been made. We were told to respond in an ARTICLE if we had more to say than 500. But when I respond in an article, I am told it is off-subject, and move on now. Yet, the comments keep coming and simply open another comment page as they rattle on. EACH INDIVIDUAL SHOULD BE ALLOWED ONLY ONE COMMENT if article-writers are held to rules. Anything less becomes bullying.

My website is www.earthchangepredictions.com, I invite you to visit! I write Exo-Trekking, a free online newsletter which goes outside the box of conventional thinking on UFOs, aliens, and the Unknown, an exciting contribution to current UFOlogy.

Lads, some of you say global warming does exist but it's natural cycle, some of you say it's secret climate modification and still others say global warming doesn't exist at all. Apparently the only answer UNacceptable to you is that humankind is contributing to it and has some responsibility. It's getting pathetic.

My website is www.earthchangepredictions.com, I invite you to visit! I write Exo-Trekking, a free online newsletter which goes outside the box of conventional thinking on UFOs, aliens, and the Unknown, an exciting contribution to current UFOlogy.

They go no where because people like you refuse to address actual concrete facts.
Just one of these facts is that actual recorded temperatures taken since humankind has become intelligent enough to record them shows no warming trend.
An average, whether it is temps or precipitation is an assessment of an area over a long period of time which includes periods of wetter and drier years and those hotter and colder to forecast what is considered an overall norm. Thus, normal is born from extreme.

Tony R. Elliott has written stories for Fate Magazine for the last 4 years, OP-ED News. He has been a Political Columnist for The Cimarron News Press in Cimarron, New Mexico from 2001 to 2003. He has also written featured editorials

I have addressed it, Tony, but then you or another commenter throw out another link as if everything on the internet that you sanction is absolute truth. You reject facts and links I gave in articles, I reject as absolute truth, your opinions and web site links. I could give more science links and logical arguments on "my side," but what's the point of wasting time? It's a stalemate. Let's have the good grace to let it go for now, as I also asked several days ago.

My website is www.earthchangepredictions.com, I invite you to visit! I write Exo-Trekking, a free online newsletter which goes outside the box of conventional thinking on UFOs, aliens, and the Unknown, an exciting contribution to current UFOlogy.

I will agree that not everything on the net is true especially most of the junk science involved with GW/CC.
It is you who reject actual weather and climate facts and choose to believe manipulated data.
The IPCC, WMO, and all UN climate related organizations do say that most of their information is based on forecasts and not actuality.
We all forget too easily about the leaked information involving these organizations trying to hide facts and falsify data.
Fact check some real records.

Tony R. Elliott has written stories for Fate Magazine for the last 4 years, OP-ED News. He has been a Political Columnist for The Cimarron News Press in Cimarron, New Mexico from 2001 to 2003. He has also written featured editorials

DIRK: I respectfully suggest you end this. We commentators will go on forever, without resolution. Want the TRUTH about Hansen's position on human contribution to warming? See:http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-16/ns_jeh.html Efforts to distort facts are doomed. Truth trumps lies Religion is emotional. Science is fact. SEARCH FOR THE VERIFIABLE FACTS! Then determine for yourself who is being "religious", and who is scientific, and who do you trust? DEMAND THE TRUTH!

Frankly, I am writing this because Comments got spammed & Rip Parker's comment is too intelligent to get lost in the chaos. There is NO "false prophet" connected to our thinking, there are nut jobs in every field but radical climate change is scientific fact & humans have/are contributing. Just because there might have been nutty "the church of round earth," intelligent people did not ignore scientific fact that the world is round (ok, spherical). SEARCH FOR VERIFIABLE FACTS.

My website is www.earthchangepredictions.com, I invite you to visit! I write Exo-Trekking, a free online newsletter which goes outside the box of conventional thinking on UFOs, aliens, and the Unknown, an exciting contribution to current UFOlogy.

Navigation

Sign in with Twitter

When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, a hyperlink to UFODIGEST.Com should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of UFODIGEST.Com's editors.

UFODIGEST.COM All rights reserved. FAIR USE NOTICE: These pages contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C $ 107. UFODigest.com Privacy Policy.